You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
Title |
Studying Seabird Diet through Genetic Analysis of Faeces: A Case Study on Macaroni Penguins (Eudyptes chrysolophus)
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS ONE, September 2007
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0000831 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Bruce E. Deagle, Nick J. Gales, Karen Evans, Simon N. Jarman, Sarah Robinson, Rowan Trebilco, Mark A. Hindell |
Abstract |
Determination of seabird diet usually relies on the analysis of stomach-content remains obtained through stomach flushing; this technique is both invasive and logistically difficult. We evaluate the usefulness of DNA-based faecal analysis in a dietary study on chick-rearing macaroni penguins (Eudyptes chrysolophus) at Heard Island. Conventional stomach-content data was also collected, allowing comparison of the approaches. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Australia | 1 | 50% |
Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 387 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United States | 6 | 2% |
Australia | 3 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 3 | <1% |
Italy | 1 | <1% |
Sweden | 1 | <1% |
South Africa | 1 | <1% |
France | 1 | <1% |
Chile | 1 | <1% |
New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
Other | 6 | 2% |
Unknown | 363 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Ph. D. Student | 102 | 26% |
Researcher | 70 | 18% |
Student > Master | 66 | 17% |
Student > Bachelor | 27 | 7% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 4% |
Other | 55 | 14% |
Unknown | 51 | 13% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 211 | 55% |
Environmental Science | 69 | 18% |
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 25 | 6% |
Earth and Planetary Sciences | 6 | 2% |
Unspecified | 5 | 1% |
Other | 14 | 4% |
Unknown | 57 | 15% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2019.
All research outputs
#2,860,685
of 22,705,019 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#37,445
of 193,828 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,028
of 69,925 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#64
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,705,019 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,828 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 69,925 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.